Frage von anrosena:
the original videos, which I cut with the studio will be 720x576 px tall. The end result should be on a plasma screen with 1024x768 px (WXGA) display. What can I do to make it in circles to no distortion, the Resolutionmöglichst good? I need urgently a tip because I am pretty pressed for time and am so far only have squashed eggs produced by getting the screen to 4:3 materialize, the zoom mode, the middle of the videos herauszoomt is synonymous not ideal, because the video is so blurred is.
Ideally an undistorted 4:3 video s.linken right edge and a field with comment.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
How did you rotated, 4:3 or 16:9?
Both formats result in a physical Resolutionvon 720x576 at 4:3, the pixels a bit stretched, so the 768x576 display is seen in significantly more 16:9, so that the picture is 1024x576. Either way you need to equalize your picture is not 1:1 on the screen type.
For a DVD or so, the equalization factor deposited means synonymous there is always your Picture 720x576, and the DVD player knows the basis of the claim, as he has to equalize.
MB
Antwort von RickyMartini:
The Resolutionvon 720x576 (5:4) you will get no higher, if you as a result of SD-like quality.
Eggs Köppe get away by the TV the correct aspect ratio (here 5:4) setting.
Comments s.Rändern can be resolved only through a reduction in the output video Resolutiondes reach - practically with the PiP feature of the studio (video track in black / gray on the track with the video).
By Titler can then insert the comments.
But it is certainly better than my suggestions for your problem. ;)
Note: The ratio data were corrected
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
The Resolutionvon 720x576 (4:3) (...)
But it is certainly better than my suggestions for your problem. ;) Oh woe ... 720x576 is not 4:3 but 5:4! Only by equalization at 768x576 it will be 4:3. Lies doch mal my post.
Antwort von Wiro:
Ideally an undistorted 4:3 video s.linken right edge and a field with comment. Time without techn. Schwelgereien and sophistry:
solves the task done by a 16x9-Project creates, then the 4:3 footage and imported s.den left pushes the edge. This leaves the right autom. an area for comments. The whole thing burn to a 16x9-DVD, and everything is on the plasma autom. properly represented and undistorted.
In order to 720x576, or 4:3 or 5:4, or else one need not to worry about, which makes the self-editing programs correctly. All I know is not what the studio can do - I know it not. As would a studio for more details, say experts.
Greeting Wiro
Antwort von anrosena:
The videos were recorded with 720x576 px. Do I understand correctly that now when I do a DVD render / burn, I can leave them as they are? And if I use the plasma screen s.den Calculator connect the videos of the hard drive only on the media player do I need to run it 'equalize', means that the number of pixels to convert?
Antwort von RickyMartini:
The Resolutionvon 720x576 (4:3) (...)
But it is certainly better than my suggestions for your problem. ;)
Oh woe ... 720x576 is not 4:3 but 5:4! Only by equalization at 768x576 it will be 4:3. Lies doch mal my post. Sorry - you've got your post before I posted - I was still in the Making (note the 2 min time difference)! ;)
I'm glad for any bonus and improvements.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
The videos were recorded with 720x576 px. Do I understand correctly that now when I do a DVD render / burn, I can leave them as they are? And if I use the plasma screen s.den Calculator connect the videos of the hard drive only on the media player do I need to run it 'equalize', means that the number of pixels to convert? I have explained to you that video in 720x576 with SD have always recorded because it is something else there and not at you for the format required, ie 4:3 or 16:9. And you respond seriously now: "720x576".
I admit it, because I feel a little vermeiert before.
Antwort von anrosena:
sorry, I was not quite in the case, because the time at the moment to slide a bit too fast for what I do - I wanted to say that the videos were recorded 4:3.
Antwort von tommyb:
This makes the choice of means easier.
1) You can post your 4:3 video clip to 720x432 and is in a 4:3 Project run. This then gives you a 4:3 picture as LetterBox. Then you have on your TV only "Zoom" setting and voila!
2) You can create a 16:9 project and your video with 4:3 aspect ratio import. Then you have left and right black bars, known as PILLARBOX.
In both cases you had an ovoid shape, not circles, in the first case, would you possibly image content prune (not optimal) in the second case of "ugly" black bars get.
Antwort von Kar.El.Gott:
This makes the choice of means easier.
1) You can post your 4:3 video clip to 720x432 and is in a 4:3 Project run. This then gives you a 4:3 picture as LetterBox. Then you have on your TV only "Zoom" setting and voila!
2) You can create a 16:9 project and your video with 4:3 aspect ratio import. Then you have left and right black bars, known as PILLARBOX.
In both cases you had an ovoid shape, not circles, in the first case, would you possibly image content prune (not optimal) in the second case of "ugly" black bars get. 1: Zoom verschlechterst with you, however, the picture quality.
2: s.die beams of viewers accustomed to very quickly if the content is correct.
Antwort von tommyb:
1) I never claimed the opposite.
2) Some but not synonymous;)
Antwort von anrosena:
for a 16:9 project in Studio I can set: pal-widescreen (for interlaced video) or pal-widescreen progressive (progressive recorded videos) My material was not included progressive, so I would choose pal-widescreen. What irritates me is that the manual on the screen as a 'Progressive widescreen plasma display is designated. Does this mean the screen is better suited for videos from the pal-widescreen progressive studio projects were rendered?
I have a whole series of other questions, hopefully you're still want to respond: one of the three videos that I do it is just a slideshow, I take as just a series of 16:9 Project and the images regardless of their actual pixel count, but always about the number of pixels of the screen is located, together? Or it would be an advantage that a PowerPoint presentation to show?
Antwort von tommyb:
Plasma and LCD displays generally have a more or less clever working electronics used interlaced material to progressive material converted. Such Television show only and are full with s.besten progressive signal to feed, since no quality consuming conversion must take place.
This is very simple words.
In each of these devices is therefore a sg deinterlacer, which is a progressive image is calculated. It can work quite well, but can be synonymous of an inferior variety - as determined as the price of components assembled on the quality of the image.
This does not mean that you're now on your Project devil come raus progressive should export test. For example, if the player (eg DVD player) is not a progressive signal can output the Television or no progressive signal via the "normal" management expects (whether a SCART cable with a composite video signal) because it is for 399, - from the Blödmarkt has been missed, then the worth anyway.
Furthermore, a conversion of interlaced => Progressiv the disadvantage that s.die quality can suffer terribly dependent on the deinterlacer or b) the Picture of jerky pans.
So let it rather interlaced.
one of three videos that I do it is just a slideshow, I take as just a series of 16:9 Project and the images regardless of their actual number of pixels, which, however, always have the number of pixels of the screen is located, together? Yes, I would also do so. Images purely as possible, and trim that in the 16:9 frame.
Powerpoint, you can of course take synonymous, but that can not produce DVDs.
Antwort von anrosena:
I just try, in the studio project as 16:9 Picture in Picture insert the 4:3 video, but even though I set the preferences 16:9 did make a 4:3 Studio Project draus, there is no right stripes. Why is this now?
Antwort von tommyb:
Links arises but a strip?
Then I would at times blindly missing "center" tap. Guck Dir mal assistance from the program.
Antwort von anrosena:
no, there is no such longitudi as a 16:9 format screen is synonymous and therefore no lateral stripe.
